Comment by ARandumGuy

anti-Zionism is the proposition that Israel must be destroyed. Zionism is the movement to ensure that the Jewish homeland in the form of the state of Israel be created and sustained, anti-Zionism is its antithesis.

This is not the same as being critical of that state, being anti-Israel isn't antisemitic (except when it is, obviously), but nor is it anti-Zionism. Saying Netanyahu should be dragged before the Hague, that the international community should demand an immediate ceasefire or force a two-state solution, that Israel must uphold the right of return: none of these are anti-Zionism, nor antisemitic.

If your position is not that Israel must be destroyed, good, don't call yourself anti-Zionist though. If it is, then yes, that's antisemitic, or the word is meaningless.

Similarly, find another slogan besides "From the river to the sea", because that is, in fact, a call to ethnically cleanse all Jews from Israel. It has meant that since the establishment of Israel, and you don't get to wander in and say it means something different at this point. If you don't mean that, don't say it. Find literally any other way to express yourself.

Anti-Zionism is asserting that the Jewish state should not exist in the land of Israel. It _is_ antisemitism. You can criticize current Israeli government and it's certain actions, while acknowledging Israel's right to exist and defend its existence.

There are plenty of people in Israel who are opposed to Netanyahu and were protesting against him before the war started, but don't doubt that destroying Hamas is justified.

> pro-Palestine (Anti-zionist)

And you’re conflating being pro-Palestine with being anti-Zionist :)

At least, if one discussed pro- or anti-Israel sentiments, it’s a little bit clear what “Israel” means. It’s a country, with something vaguely resembling identifiable borders, with a particular government, citizens, a military, etc.

What, exactly, is “Palestine” if one is pro-Palestine or anti-Palestine? Is it the people? (If so, which people? Those who lived in the area currently known as Israel + Gaza + the West Bank and their descendants, but not the descendants of the Jews who settled in the region since the Zionist movement got started? Is it Palestinian refugees as defined by UNRWA? Is it the current civilization in Gaza and the West Bank? What about the multigenerational refugees in camps in nearby countries? [0]. Is it the land itself? Is it the current governments (plural!)? Is it the idea that Israel ought not to exist? (If so, what does Israel not existing even mean?). Is it the idea that innocent Gazans ought not to feel safe in their homes and have access to food, clean water, electricity, and medicine?

The whole situation is an unbelievable mess, both because the present situation is a mess and the history is a mess. I don’t a critically considered opinion can be summarized by a single hyphenated term or even two of them.

[0] Yes, there are people born in refugee camps in a couple of neighboring countries who are somehow not citizens of those countries. From a US perspective, this is very strange. The descendants of people who fled to the US are most definitely citizens. I don’t think most of them consider themselves to be refugees, nor do many other people consider them to be refugees, nor do they live in refugee camps.

If the mandate of the nation of Israel is to provide a place of refuge to Jewish people around the world, it must be a country that favors Jewish religion/ethnicity. I think this was the basis for the two-state solution, which somehow seems like even more of an impossibility than in the past. The mandate of Israel as a Jewish state is at odds with a free democracy with equal rights for citizens of all ethnicities/religions. I am also a complete outside observer and have no insights to add, other than what is happening to innocent people has been awful and tragic.